[bucslover68]

Alright, for all the people bashing Haywood, if you think you could possibly do better then why haven't you? Look, Haywood made two mistakes tonight. Yes, he should have gone for two, but the last time he had that decision to make in a close game was Ashland in '06... And, in his defense, had we not gotten the 2, the safety wouldn't have put us w/in a field goal of the win.

The second was going after the last punt. If we don't go after that kick, we're down 4 on about the 35. I like our chances of getting a TD better from the 35.

For that matter, if I'm Holcomb, I tell my punter to catch the snap and run around in the end zone to eat time off the clock. So he made a mistake too.

And, as great of a game as Fugate had, he should have SO gone down in the end zone on that interception.

First, this is in no way bashing Haywood, just analyzing some plays and the game. There is no reason not to go for two. Down 5, you go for two. That's the coaches rule and we didn't do it. If we do not get it, we are down 5. Contrary to what you say, the safety still would have put us within 3 at 14-11. Kicking the extra point at 14-9 gave us no help or advantage at all. Basically there is no difference, in football, with a 4 or 5 point deficit. On the punt, you always block it if you can. If the ball bounces our way, and stays in the endzone and we recover, then most likely we win the game. A coach would never tell his player to just run around in the endzone, because no advantage is gained. If he would have been tackled he could have fumbled and Belfry recovered or even if Breathitt recovered, then it still would have been a safety. Anyway, IMO the inability of Belfry to hang on to the football and score in the red zone was the real keys to the game.